NSW hoon act

mr_xr8 · 03-04-2008, 03:04 PM

http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/nswbills.nsf/0/c0dfe2f32e25e84aca2573fb0017c203/$FILE/b2007-159-d15-House.pdf

hope the link works

philstoj · 03-04-2008, 03:45 PM

Yes it works if you paste it in a new browser.

But here it is:http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/pro...-d15-House.pdf

Thank the idiots for those laws now, its only going to get worse...

kyro_02 · 03-04-2008, 03:58 PM

pretty much NSW people are screwed :P let's hope other states do not follow! none wants their car crushed, taking away you car for ever, now instead .. crushing it.. meh. either way I suppose, you'll lose it regardless! but just the thought of your car getting crush is gonna bring some tears.

I guess stupid regulations are going to continuely come in, as long as stupid people want them... I think it's getting too regulated now though.

Now, I only scrolled through that, but did anyone see if it had amendment for "drunks to get their cars crushed too" - to that affect? I wonder.. haha.

King Nothing · 03-04-2008, 04:14 PM

So, if I am reading this right, the car could be crushed even if the registered owner was not driving it. Not only is it car specific, but the notice is valid for 5 years, and does not have to be related to that car i.e. hoon twice in one car, get it clamped, sell it after 3 months, two years later in a new car get a third notice and get it crushed? And does the clamping bit mean it can be left clamped on the street (anywhere) for 3 months?

So if the above is true, could the following scenario be true?

A father of 3 boys has a number of cars. Boy 1 in car A, boy 2 in car B and boy 3 in car C. If each of the 3 boys get done under this legislation in 3 succesive weeks, the father has one car impounded/clamped 3 suburbs over for 3 months and another car taken away for good? How is that fair?

FGII-XR6 · 03-04-2008, 06:54 PM

the reason for this is the brain dead who insist on street racing and doing burnouts( look here http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=11215656 ). yes this includes those tools on this forum who brag about speed or burnouts then say " of course it was on a private road I wouldn't break the law ;) " yea right . that having been said if these laws are to apply to "hoons" it should apply equally to the even worse type of brain dead morons drunken potential killers. in this case though maybe they should be left inside for the crash test

blackers10 · 03-04-2008, 07:02 PM

problem is
MOST people who drive like ****s drive standard crap boxes and dont care if they have a licence or not etc..

its just a pity that everybody thinks modified cars are more of a problem

Walkinshaw · 03-04-2008, 07:25 PM

I don't think the law is that harsh. What seems rediclious is the 5yr period attached to the offences. Why not make it inline with other driving offences (3yrs).

DeansXR8 · 03-04-2008, 10:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyro_02

Now, I only scrolled through that, but did anyone see if it had amendment for "drunks to get their cars crushed too" - to that affect? I wonder.. haha.

totally agree, would be nice if they put this much concern into drunk drivers AND driving while disqualified..really when they extend a ban on a person for driving without a licence, does anyone else think they just laugh to themselves go outside the court house and drive home EVERY time??

GT-E · 03-04-2008, 10:51 PM

This law is totally up to the "opinion" of the police and will be subject to abuse and explotation.
To have your car confiscated on the sole sayso of a police officer, without any immediate way of appeal is W R O N G. What stops a police officer on a power trip or with a chip on his shoulded pulling you over ad say he saw you lose traction.
You have no defence and lose your car until you can go to court. Then it is his word against yours.

I am astounded that these changes in the name of stamping out Anti Hoon behaviour has not been more widely publicised. It is a joke and should be appealed.

The G6ET Spot · 03-04-2008, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Nothing

And does the clamping bit mean it can be left clamped on the street (anywhere) for 3 months?

So if the above is true, could the following scenario be true?

A father of 3 boys has a number of cars. Boy 1 in car A, boy 2 in car B and boy 3 in car C. If each of the 3 boys get done under this legislation in 3
succesive weeks, the father has one car impounded/clamped 3 suburbs over for 3 months and another car taken away for good? How is that fair?

[7] Section 218 (1A)–(1D)
Insert after section 218 (1):

(1A) The police officer may do any one or more of the following:

(a) clamp the motor vehicle (if the police officer is a clamping
agent) or cause the vehicle to be clamped by a clamping
agent,

(b) seize and take charge of the motor vehicle and cause it to
be removed to a place determined by the Commissioner,

(c) immediately, or as soon as practicable afterwards, give the
driver, and (if the driver is not the registered operator of the
motor vehicle) the registered operator, a notice requiring
the driver or registered operator to remove or cause the
vehicle to be removed to, or produce or cause the motor
vehicle to be produced at, a place specified in the notice
within 10 days after the notice is given (a production
notice).

(1B) A production notice may be given personally or by post and must
state the ground on which it is being given.

(1C) A motor vehicle may be clamped under subsection (1A) at:

(a) a road or public place, or

(b) any place under the control of or used for the purposes of
clamping motor vehicles by a clamping agent, or

(c) the home address of the driver or registered operator.
Note. Home address is defined in section 3.

(1D) Subsection (1C) (c) does not confer power to enter any place that
could not otherwise lawfully be entered.

ea90gl · 04-04-2008, 12:01 AM

So a guy has an old POS he wants to get rid of, now instead of going through the effort of dumping it at a depot and getting a mate to get him he can just hoon around until the cops get rid of it for him?

Rodp · 04-04-2008, 05:13 AM

I'm just wondering about the implications of a mechanic giving the car a bit of a squirt during a service? If he was to cross it up infront of plod, does that mean you'll get to see it crushed?

Is there a sub-clause that allows you to nominate whether the driver who caused the car to be crushed, be sat in the car during the crushing?

FGII-XR6 · 04-04-2008, 08:53 AM

there are ground for appeal and this would be a suitable one i would think If my car was clamped after a mechanic did this i would ring the cops and explain the situation and demand my car be released . if they refused to i would cut the clamp off and dare them to prosecute me . this would be an ideal test of the flaws in the leglislation

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rodp

I'm just wondering about the implications of a mechanic giving the car a bit of a squirt during a service? If he was to cross it up infront of plod, does that mean you'll get to see it crushed?

Is there a sub-clause that allows you to nominate whether the driver who caused the car to be crushed, be sat in the car during the crushing?

Keepleft · 04-04-2008, 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeansXR8

snip - would be nice if they put this much concern into drunk drivers AND driving while disqualified..really when they extend a ban on a person for driving without a licence, does anyone else think they just laugh to themselves go outside the court house and drive home EVERY time??

Patience, patience.....

iliov · 04-04-2008, 11:38 AM

They have had these in vic for about a year now. Absolute joke of a law.

Pinch · 04-04-2008, 01:45 PM

I am a lot more hesitatant to take off a bit quicker from the lights (up to the speed limit) these days just in case someone beside just happens to do the same thing and I get pinged for 'street racing'.

When I had some recent troubles with the Sportsman I gave it some off the lights into a 100 zone to see if the issue was resolving. I started backing off at 90 and when I hit 100 I put the cruise on. I didn't realise until I settled into the cruise that someone else was just in a hurry or something beside me and did the same thing. Neither of us exceeded the speed limit, but we did leave the rest of the traffic behind. How would that look? Could I justify that? I never exceeded the speed limit or broke any other law that I know of but it scared me at the time to think that I could possible get pinged. I wasn't red lining, or flat changing in a manual, or chirping the wheels in gear changes, but this sort of thing could be seen as a cop as racing.

A bit scary.

fmc351 · 04-04-2008, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinch

I am a lot more hesitatant to take off a bit quicker from the lights (up to the speed limit) these days just in case someone beside just happens to do the same thing and I get pinged for 'street racing'.

When I had some recent troubles with the Sportsman I gave it some off the lights into a 100 zone to see if the issue was resolving. I started backing off at 90 and when I hit 100 I put the cruise on. I didn't realise until I settled into the cruise that someone else was just in a hurry or something beside me and did the same thing. Neither of us exceeded the speed limit, but we did leave the rest of the traffic behind. How would that look? Could I justify that? I never exceeded the speed limit or broke any other law that I know of but it scared me at the time to think that I could possible get pinged. I wasn't red lining, or flat changing in a manual, or chirping the wheels in gear changes, but this sort of thing could be seen as a cop as racing.

A bit scary.

In all fairness, there are situations where just about any law can be a bit dodgy if the officer wants too. Thats true of any job, think about your own and where you could be dodgy if you chose too. The truth is MOST police arent vengeful power trippers, its just most culprits are flat out liars or just unable to reflect on a situation fairly preferring to blame someone other than themselves.

The situation you describe could potentially come up, and if you got out of the car giving attitude, arrogance, demanding your rights, leaving the doof doof blaring until he is at the window, laughing about it with your mates etc, then just maybe we can put it down to 'karma' and the signs of that personality would indicate you most likely were well aware of the car next to you, youre just a smart ar5e. I doubt many would have the issue, if you spoke decently to the officer, had no attitude, youll be fine if no other aspect of a 'race' is present. Let the officer talk to you dont try and preempt him all the time, answer his questions without attitude, youll be fine. Basically, display a personality that is reasonable, would help if you really had one as police are well aware of fakes.

Life isnt that hard, most people and their attitudes just make a motsa of it being 'try hards'.

Fev · 04-04-2008, 02:37 PM

i almost got booked 2 nights ago.
was turning Left off pennant hills road at thompsons corner onto castle hill road in Sydney, i came around the corner and booted it a bit, not exceeding the speed limit, no breaking traction but with my exhaust and concrete barriers right next to me my exhaust was amplified and there were 3 cop cars in the parking lot about 100m up the road from the corner pulling people over(it was about 1am so no1 about).
He pulled me and a red p-plater(friends girlfriend) over, she did not floor it or anything.
they breath tested the both of us, she was let go but i stayed as i had some infringements. No front p-plate(they fall off constantly, i have a stash in my glove compartment), blue number plate LED's(still gotta change them) and a cop had heard me floor it and knew it was me as the other car was a stock verada, asked if i knew the new hoon laws, i said not really and went on about confiscation of license etc etc though not in a bad way, they were all nice guys. I was about to crap myself as i only have 1 point left. anyway's they let me go with just a warning to change the rear lights and behave lol great to see some cops are alright

Pinch · 04-04-2008, 06:18 PM

Great advice FMC351. My young and dumb days are now well and truly over (I did have my slight moments though which I am now mature enough reflect on and think were stupid) but I know that if act like a tool, especially to the plod then you get treated like one.

My wife and I know first hand the results of bad driving, and she has to live with the effects of the inability of a 3 week licenced P plater to drive properly for the rest of her life. As a result I am pretty pedantic about my driving now to the point of indicating left off every roundabout - hardly anyone does that.

In all honesty I doubt my scenario would come to anything, and if it did I would be my usual calm and professional self and deal with it, but having studied jurisprudence it just got me thinking thats all.

fmc351 · 04-04-2008, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinch

In all honesty I doubt my scenario would come to anything, and if it did I would be my usual calm and professional self and deal with it, but having studied jurisprudence it just got me thinking thats all.

Yeah, on jurisprudence its fair comment. Some of the laws IMO in a perfect world are a tad on the wrong side of 'fairness' given the type of system we promote as 'fair and just'. But the situation is becoming a major problem and needs to be tackled, and there just isnt an alternative, and doing nothing is unacceptable given the growth of the problem.

Claims that its not right for police to make the decision on the spot, or somehow communist like is just foolish. Police have always detected a speeding motorist and applied the fine in that manner. Then, and with the laws in question, the driver is able to challenge the claims in court. This is nothing new. Imagine how cluttered courts would be if all these events required a court appearance for proper justice to be served. Imagine the flow on effect for other criminal trials and the wait for a speedy trial.

All laws can be 'manipulated', or circumstances of fact can be 'massaged' to be outside a given law if the officer was so inclined, that potential is unavoidable but the propensity for it to occur can be minimised through selection of professionals, minimised, not guaranteed as this is not possible in any realm of reality. There was the story of the knickers model in Qld yesterday who is allegedly being stalked by an officer abusing his position. Im not going to comment on the truth of her claims (I only know what everyone else knows), but regardless of that case, its not out of the question it happens, but it is out of the question thats it commonplace. Judges and police are human beings and in the end there is no way to remove the human element from the equation. Thats why not anyone can fill these roles in society, we can be confident that the majority have ethics and dedication to the cause they serve to overcome the tendency for power tripping.

There will be the odd injustice, while every person on the wrong side of these laws will claim they are the odd injustice. Supposedly jails are full of the innocent.